river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brouwer <mark.brou...@cheiron.org>
Subject Re: Integrity.NO constraint results in selection of X500Provider instances
Date Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:18:35 GMT
Bob Scheifler wrote:
> Mark Brouwer wrote:
>>  From com.sun.jini.logging.Levels.FAILED:
>> "FAILED is a message level indicating that a facility has experienced a
>> failure that it will reflect to its caller.
>> FAILED messages are intended to provide users with information about
>> failures produced by internal components in order to assist with
>> debugging problems in systems with multiple components. This level is
>> initialized to 600."
>  From the logging principles document we used during Davis:
>   FAILED  - serious, unexpected "problems" encountered by a component that
>             the user/deployer/administrator needs to know about, which the
>             component propagates to its caller, and which may ultimately be
>             logged by some other component at a higher level (such as 
> INFO).
> http://archives.java.sun.com/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0406&L=jini-users&P=R6550&I=-3


So you suggest that the specs for Levels.FAILED should be changed
according to the principles. And are these principles followed
consistently throughout the JTSK code?

Can you indicate whether it would be handy to see the outcome of the
discovery provider operation and if so at what level do you envison the
logging to take place.

I will go through a the JTSK code and see the usage of FAILED myself, as
well as some other pieces of code as I think most of the times I used it
as specified for Levels.FAILED. But as I have other obligation I won't
be able to get back to this today.

View raw message